MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Early Development of Executive Functions

2006· book-chapter· en· W2481933101 on OpenAlexaff
Adele Diamond

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford University Press eBooks · 2006
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience, Education and Cognitive Function
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExecutive functionsDistractionCognitive flexibilityCognitionWorking memoryFlexibility (engineering)Cognitive psychologyPsychologyFunction (biology)Control (management)Focus (optics)Attentional controlCognitive scienceComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceNeuroscienceManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Executive function, also known as cognitive control or supervisory attention, is required whenever going “on automatic”. Classes of situations in which executive functions are required include novel tasks and situations that require concentration, planning, problem solving, coordination, change, conscious choices among alternatives, or overriding a strong internal or external pull. Component cognitive abilities that constitute what collectively is known as executive function include the following: inhibition, that is, the ability to ignore distraction and stay focused, and to resist making one response and instead make another; working memory, that is, the ability to hold information in mind and manipulate it; cognitive flexibility, that is, the ability to switch perspectives flexibly, focus of attention, or response mappings. These abilities are crucial to all forms of cognitive performance. The ability to inhibit attention to distractors makes possible selective and sustained attention.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.010

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.181 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations719
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOxford University Press eBooksSame topicNeuroscience, Education and Cognitive FunctionFrench-language works237,207